That chocolate ain't gonna pay for itself!

Rich people tend not be good people in general

I think it's just really rich people, but tech CEOs are in this terminally online culture so not only does it all end up out there but they seem to feed off each other and try to bizarrely one up each other.

Once you start getting real money, you start noticing how much is going to taxes.

Even though the net income is more money than you've ever seen in your life, and the meagre fraction that is going to welfare is abysmally small, yet was a true lifeline to you when you needed it mere weeks ago... it still makes your blood boil knowing you're not getting everything you feel you deserve.

Imagine that amplified x 10, and you can see how a CEO might feel that they're throwing tens of thousands a month on what they feel are undeserving recipients. All they see are the zeroes, not the percentage.

TL;DR - we all inhabit the same planet, but we live in different worlds.

Setting up is a piece of cake but getting your emails through spam filters can be a pain.

Have you considered Tuta?

I don't know any guide, but deliverability is the biggest concern and it may also not be fully under control. Sometimes IP blocks get blacklisted or deranked and your emails end in spam, and you might not even know that.

NordVPN is superior in every way. If you have ProtonVPN, dump it and swap to Nord.

Have we learned nothing of the whole "spend millions upon millions on YouTube sponsorships" debacle? Nord absolutely is hiding something from us.

If you need to forward ports, AirVPN seems the best right now. Otherwise, Mullvad.

FYI, Nord no longer allows port forwarding as of a couple years ago. Proton is one of the few providers who still have that feature.

Compare:

https://support.nordvpn.com/hc/en-us/articles/19483392309649-Does-NordVPN-offer-port-forwarding

https://protonvpn.com/support/port-forwarding

Growing up, if you had told me half or more of America would end up elevating a rapist to the presidency and prostrating themselves at his feet, I'd have laughed you out of the room. This nation has sunk LOW.

Bill Clinton won reelection. Now, granted, he was not Trump levels, he was a piece of shit who at the very least abused his role and power over women. Now, even after me too, he's a beloved elder statesman. Just saying, the nation has sunk lower, but I don't know that's a lot lower than where we were when we were kids.

FWIW if you switched once then next switch is RADICALLY easier.

I’ve liked my experience setting up Purelymail with a custom domain!

Same here. Fuck me.

It's not even a matter of "thinking" that, it's basically what he said. All his "siding" is in the context of antitrust and breaking tech monopolies. I don't think trump will do much in this space, but dems didn't do much either. If Trump will (the election is over anyway, so we are not discussing of choosing trump for this) it's good, even if it comes from the Trump administration.

He doesn't. it's just lube to help his customers swallow his bullshit

So sounds like their main concern is addressing the abuses of the FAANG monopolies, and only a Republican has talked to them about it.

I guess that is understandable in that very narrow lens, but it's a bit laughable considering how all the big tech companies are also cozying up to the Trump administration. All this has done for me is make me wary of anything Proton does now.

These fuckers act like they've never heard of Lina Khan. Let's see if Republicans try to replace her with someone with a stronger track record. Or, if they're so serious about tech competition maybe they'll get on board with net neutrality.

And look, I actually like Gail Slater (the Trump nominee that kicked off this thread). She's got some bona fides, and I welcome Republicans taking antitrust more seriously, and rolling back the damage done by Robert Bork and his adherents (including and probably most significantly Ronald Reagan).

But to pretend that Democrats are less serious about antitrust than Republicans ignores the huge moves that the Biden administration have made in this area, including outside of big tech.

By my lights your response is quite effective, and while I appreciate the modesty I think it's appropriate to bring it over here:

Unfortunately, there's a line beyond which it's not okay to view a political party through one issue, and IMO the Republicans have crossed that line.

Privacy is a human rights issue. Republicans have signaled very strongly that they're going to violate more human rights. It's a net loss for privacy if that happens, even if big tech is a bit more restrained.

I'm sorry @protonprivacy, you've failed this test IMO. It would be one thing to say that given that the Republicans are in power, that Gail Slater is a good pick, but that's not the stance you took.